This twitter post showed Zehaf-Bibeau with what appears to be a Winchester lever action rifle. At first, it was unclear if this was the same firearm that he used to murder Cpl. Nathan Cirillo before entering Canada’s Parliament building and continue his shooting spree. But the BBC quickly came up with an identification of the firearm used – a Winchester lever action shotgun . . .

From the BBC:

He said police were trying to piece together how Zehaf-Bibeau acquired a Winchester lever-action shotgun, as he was banned from owning firearms due to his criminal convictions.

Then the Ottawa Sun took a shot at the subject:

Police still don’t know how he got his hands on the Winchester 3030 pump-action rifle he used to gun down Cpl. Cirillo at the War Memorial.

The National Post finally got it right. From the Nationalpost.com:

 At a Thursday press conference, RCMP commissioner Bob Paulson confirmed that Zehaf-Bibeau had carried out the shootings with a Winchester 30-30 lever action rifle, a quintessentially Canadian bush gun that is not normally the first choice of would-be terrorists.

Here is a clearer picture of the model of rifle used.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention a source form the United States. From wyomingnews.com:

Police said he was armed with a lever-action Winchester rifle, an old-fashioned, relatively slow-firing weapon.

The 30-30 was considered a powerful and quick-firing rifle in its day. President Teddy Roosevelt was rather impressed with it.

 He acquired an 1894 similar to all his other rifles in extras and embellishments and used it on an antelope hunt. His “little .30” as he called it, was able to knock down a good sized antelope at a distance of more than 180 yds. After witnessing the fantastic shot and the irrefutable and immediate results, his guide said that the gun was just “aces” in his book.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch

72 Responses to What Gun Did the Ottawa Jihadi Terrorist Use?

      • In the postmodern world of the cosmopolites knowing about technical details is an impediment to what’s important. It’s all about feelings for them. They strongly feel that guns are too dangerous for people to have and that gives them a moral imperative demand more control. For them, that’s all that counts.

      • Well, for breaking news, I expect it to be wrong.

        If you look, this is true for EVERYTHING reported. It’s just that you don’t know enough to catch what is wrong.

        Perhaps we are getting the news from an alternate dimension that’s almost exactly like ours, but not quite.

  1. Loaded with modern ammo (Hornady Leverevolution), the ol’ thurty-thurty is easily the ballistic equivalent of the AK, probably more accurate, and nearly as fast to fire (at least until the mag runs dry).

    • .30-30 can go above and beyond 7.62×39 though. 7.62×39 is equivalent to a really light load (which is still adequate for Southern Whitetails).

      • Just depends what you’re doing with each round. In close quarters, or even up to 300 yards or so, that 30-30 is going to hit much harder than the 7.62. It’ll have higher velocity and mass, which translates to greater energy, but somehow pulls off a relatively light recoil. Up to 75 yards, the range where most deer are taken, it might be unbeatable (but check with true hunters on that point.)

        The big drawback, again, depending on your application, is trajectory and short range. 30-30 shoots fairly flat as far as it goes, but then just plummets at about 300 yards. The 7.62 is still taking care of business at 500 yards, but as you mentioned, accuracy may suffer.

        Both rounds are legendary in their own ways. Real marvels of engineering.

        • Jonathan, the 7.62×39 loses a lot of energy at even 200yds, much less 500yds and the bullet drop of a standard 124gr 7.62×39 projectile is around 10ft at that distance. “Taking care of business” with a 7.62×39 at 500yds is a spray and pray prospect at best. I think you’re confusing the capability of the AK round with that of the higher velocity flatter shooting 7.62x51mm NATO/.308 Winchester round.

        • No, sir. While I thank you for your feedback, I’m afraid it is you who is confused and/or mistaken. I know what the .308 and 7.62X51NATO rounds are. For starters, those are two separate rounds. Just as .223 and 5.56NATO are similar, but not identical, neither are these two rounds. You should be careful not to refer to them interchangeably, as it may lead to attempting to use the actual ammunition interchangeably, which could be unfortunate. Nevertheless, since I never mentioned those rounds or mistook another round for them in my original post, I’m not going to address them further. I will support my original point, though, comparing the .30-30 and 7.62 X 39, which were in the original poster’s comments and which I addressed. Fair enough? OK.

          7.62X39, 123 gr demonstrates the following energies (fl.lb.) at the corresponding distances:

          1,521 @ muzzle, 1,147 @ 100 yds, 850 @ 200 yds, 623@ 300 yds, 459 @ 400 yds, and 350 @ 500 yds. I don’t challenge that it loses energy, or let’s call it “a lot” of energy, as you do, but I stand by the characterization that 350 ft. lbs. of energy at 500 yards is still “taking care of business.” The proof? Let’s compare it to the handgun rounds that most of us bet our lives on, shall we? 38 Special 125 gr is 225 ft. lbs. at the muzzle. 9mm 124 gr (standard load, not even P+) has energy of 339 ft. lbs. at the MUZZLE. So 7.62X39 packs a comparable, actually slightly greater, wallop after five football fields of distance, as your basic GLOCK does at pointblank range. I’d say that takes care of business, and blows away your first point. On to the second.

          You said the drop of a standard 7.62X39 is “around 10ft at that distance” of 500 yards. In fact, it is 95.6”, which is less than 8 feet. (If you disagree, take it up with Hornady and their ballistics chart.) You don’t get a 25%+ fudge factor on your second point, especially when your first point has already been discredited. Want to move on to point #3 of yours? OK.

          I’ll grant you that “taking care of business” may not be a very precise term, and certainly is open to interpretation. However, since I explicitly allowed for open ended application of the round and specifically acknowledged that accuracy may suffer, the looseness of the term is not enough hook for you to hang your hat on. Granted, the 7.62X39’s effective range, i.e., the max. distance a reasonably trained shooter could target with accuracy, is probably less than 400 yards or so. Still, for suppression fire, repelling waves of troops, or even terrorizing urban citizenry, delivering pointblank pistol power at 500 yards, albeit not particularly accurately, is still taking care of business. It just depends, as I said, on what your business is. Spray and pray? Perhaps, but that’s still a valid application, and it can be done out to 500 yards.

      • Jonathan, thanks for removing all doubt that you absolutely don’t know what the f**k you’re talking about. If nothing else you’re consistent with the bull$#it comments and wannabe expert observations on all things firearms as made evident with you’re latest embarrassingly uninformed claim that the 7.62×39 somehow is “is still taking care of business at 500 yards”, and no , the bullet drop is not 8ft, a 123gr projectile with an average muzzle velocity of 2350fps drops over 10ft (123.26 inches) at 500yds with velocity reduced to around 1060fps and only a measly 310 ft lbs of energy left.

        • Oh cry cry cry, Teddy. You opened up your mouth to take a swipe at me, for what we now see was no other reason than that you harbor long held and deep seated resentments against me. In response, you got bitch slapped with the full force of facts, down to the last datum, from Hornady no less, on the points of the debate. Don’t cry about it, just deal with it. “Measly” 310 ft.lbs. Good grief that was a desperate display on your part.

          So what’s your big encore? Why, an emotion laden enfilade of filth and personal attacks, that’s what! How about you just sit down and shut up until you’ve learned enough to speak intelligently, let alone critically, on the topics here?

          I get it, you’re madder than a wet hen that this little know-it-all punk just rolled up the newspaper and swatted your furry little butt in front of all of these people on an issue you consider your own personal preserve. But you know what? I don’t care. You brought it on yourself. You took a sloppy shot at me thinking not only that you had the right to try it, but that you were good enough to pull it off. You don’t and you weren’t, and that’s fine, but don’t burst into tears over it now, mijo. Just go huddle butt hurt in the corner until you’ve thought it over, learned your lesson, and are ready to rejoin the rest of us.

        • Wow, a lot of venom between the two of you over extremely similar rounds. .30-30 has a bit of an edge over 7.62×39 at 100 yards, and 7.62×39 has a bit of an edge over .30-30 at 500 yards, although neither is really a great round for 500 yards. The difference isn’t worth getting agitated over.

    • Yep. It’s been those damnable “assault rifles” for quite a while now. Before that it was “Saturday night specials”. I recall the Whitman shooting from the Texas Tower lead to cries against “scope-sighted sniper rifles”.
      The NFA came about because of the hype about the “gangster” weapons used in the Valentines Day massacre. The Lincoln assassination triggered a lot of anti-Derringer hostility. People seem to like to have a focal point of some particular type of weapon for their “blame the gun” mindset.

      • Yep, ever single one of those were about the tool, not the person. Misplaced hate is just history repeating itself.

        • Because it’s not PC to hate a person but perfectly fine to hate an object. Especially if the object isn’t related to a protected race.

    • They warned us back in the late 1800s that those repeating lever action assault rifles were insanely powerful! They put more firepower in a single man’s hands than had ever been seen before!

  2. He was on a prohibited list so he took what he could get. Besides, the tube magazine on the .30-30, like those of shotguns, is capable of unlimited capacity. Fire 2, thumb 2 more in.

    Tacticool operators operating operationaly worry about transitioning from their long gun to their handgun.

    We hillbilly’s just kept track of our ammo and only fired when we could hit.

  3. So one guy with a lever gun had the capital of Canada soiling its panties? The Canucks have fallen even further than we have.

    • Re: “Ralph” saying “So one guy with a lever gun had the capital of Canada soiling its panties? The Canucks have fallen even further than we have.”

      Yep, my thoughts exactly. And to make things worse, Canadian soldiers were told to avoid wearing their uniform in public shortly after, to avoid attracting more attacks. In other words, our soldiers were ordered to dress like civilians and hide among the women and children…

      Lord have mercy on us…

      • Canadian soldiers were once the scourge of the Wehrmacht. The mighty Heer sh!t their field gray trousers when they saw the Canadians coming. What are they now?

        • Canadians did pretty well in Afghanistan. Don’t judge the soldiers by the choices made by their politicians.

          Beside which, if you look at Canadian army choices wrt service firearms and uniforms/camo, it’s clear that the people making the decisions there are much saner than those calling the shots in US. I mean, how much LSD do you need to take to ever think that UCP was a good idea? now look at CADPAT! And Diemaco C7 and C8 never had this stupid 3-round burst, nor the uselessly overcomplicated A2 rear sight. OTOH, they did go for heavier barrel profiles and overall beefier rifle.

    • lol no one is soiling their panties, we aren’t a nation of cowards like you guys. This was one lunatic loser, nothing more.

  4. You would think internationally renowned news organizations would have at least one–one– editor who knew enough about firearms to know the difference between a shotgun and a rifle, a lever-action and a slide action. This is utterly ridiculous.

  5. In this situation, it seem reasonable to consider that the death of Cpl. Cirillo may be attributable to Canada’s gun control laws.

    Without the heavy restrictions on handgun ownership that are in place, it is more likely that the shooter would have chosen a handgun and Cpl. Cirillo could have been protected by body armor. I’m not certain if the guards wear body armor routinely, but if they do, he would have stood a chance against a handgun round while a 30-30 would have penetrated it.

    – bsd

    • I find it highly unlikely that a guard in a largely ceremonial role would wear any kind of protective gear whatsoever.

      • The Old Guard at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlingron wear Army Dress Blues with no body armor.

        They also carry loaded M14 service rifles loaded with 7.62×51 in 20 round magazines.

        • Get out of the CITY! Loaded? Do they really? Are you sure? That would make me so proud I might mess my pants. I’d have guessed the chances were zero.

          My position is that anyone who is directed to carry a gun should insist that gun be loaded.

          Let’s also remember that however pretty they look on that honor guard, they are, first and always, Marines. Even without ammo, a smart person with a hatchet, for example, would leave them be.

        • Re: LarryinTx–take another look at what John Butler stated. He had it right. Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is guarded by Soldiers. The Marines guard embassies and have the Silent Drill Team up at 8th and I. I couldn’t tell you whether they have any rounds handy while drilling. Perhaps a few Guardian Angels stationed about the perimeter. We learned our lesson the hard way back in ’83 during the ammo and ROE fiasco in Lebanon.

    • Cpl Cirillo is dead because Canada’s military & civilian leadership FAILED to access the situation involving murder of a solider the day before and chose pomp over prudence and denied arming soldiers in their charge. In fact countless civilians are murdered because legsitlators choose to allow it. Denial of lawful self protection to soldiers and citizens right to carry arms is evidence they are complicite in their deaths.

  6. That’s odd, because the BBC is usually my first choice for accurate, non-hysterical firearms-related reporting.

    Oh well, it’s back to the Guardian.

  7. Goes to prove that a man (or woman) bent on murder will accomplish their nefarious task using what they can muster. In it’s day it would have been considered an “assault weapon” capable of firing many shots and blah, blah, blah…(Custer would agree I’m SURE lol). A person who wants to commit murder will do so, regardless. Canada is gun control HEAVY and yet not one single law stopped this TERRORIST from committing these acts. Had someone walking down one of those streets been ARMED then the man would most likely have been STOPPED before he saw his plan come to its fruition. This is the plight of all who suffer under the stupidity and uselessness of “gun control”. Everyone is a victim without the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of self defense!

  8. I don’t believe the attacker used a .30-30 Winchester caliber lever action rife. First of all, the barrel and tube magazine look awfully skinny. Second, I heard a news source claim the rife was a .22 caliber lever action rifle. Will we ever know for certain?

      • I can’t see the bottom of the action area clearly, but it appears to me that it is even a pre-64 model. There’s a hint of a shadow in the area where there should be a screw on the bottom that indicates pre-64 rifles.

    • From the picture, it appears to be a WInchester 1894. I can’t determine the cartridge, so we’ll have to take the press’ reporting of the .30-30 for right now.

      While I cannot be certain, from the shadow on the bottom of the receiver that I see where the pivot ping lock screw would be, it appears to be a pre-64 model. Most of the blueing is gone from the receiver; this rifle appears to have had a hard life.

  9. I fully expect the Canadian political class to once again demonize guns and gun owners, and turn a pair of blind eyes to the Salafist influence growing in Muslim communities in the west and being imported through their immigration laws.

    All secular democracies in the west need to wake up and realize that Islam is incompatible with both democracy and secular democracy. There can be no reconciliation between Islam and the west any more than there is between oil and water.

    The hard truth is starting to dawn on citizens first, and the political leadership is having to be dragged, kicking and mewling, into the realization that Islam is an existential threat to the west. But the political leadership class of the west, isolated and cosseted in their gated communities, whisked away from anything unpleasant by their taxpayer-funded praetorian guards, will have to lose elections to be taught the point, much as they are starting to lose elections in Europe on the issue.

  10. Can you block the libtard proabortion video popups bashing Joni Ernst?

    Ernst is a progun Senate candidate that is going to take the seat currently occupied by POS dem Tom Harkin

  11. Gun, knife, bomb, vehicle.. It really has no difference from intent to end result, the Point A to Point B of violence. Evil will find a way.

  12. I think a fair amount of chillin’ on this story needs to be done. This was not a terrorist, he was a terrorist wannabe who had his passport jerked for his radical religious beliefs. He was a loner who didn’t fit in–and his dreams of jihad squashed, he did the same thing that the teenage mutant shooters in the US do–went to a nearby public forum and went out “in a blaze of glory” (at least in his mind).

    • There have been calls for ‘lone wolf’ attacks by Islamist leaders for a few years now, increasing in frequency with the success our military has had destroying the original Al Qaeda and other organized groups. Such attacks would look exactly like this.

      Subscribing to terrorist ideology, plotting and conducting an attack on a target selected in accordance with that ideology, using tactics advocated by leaders of the community he wanted to join… How is it that he isn’t a terrorist?

  13. I know I am overreacting. I still feel violated by this======… It is because I have made an emotional attachment to this very make and model.

    If you have ever held and fired a Winchester lever action “30” you would take one fast glance at that picture and say to yourself, “Is that man using a 30?” Which is exactly what I instantly did when I saw that picture above of that deplorable man.

    You would not mistake it for a shotgun. The gun is unmistakable once you have fired it. It is one of the most delightful, responsive rifles ever, and it is unmistakably NOT a shotgun.

    I love these rifles. They were originally called a Model 94 carbine (as in 1894, the original .30 carbine), and the round only became known as a 30-30 after the patent ran out. It is a fabulous weapon. It is light, powerful, accurate, high capacity, and very easy to get on target quickly. That might be why the shooter chose this rifle, considering his options were limited in Canada. The bluing and stock on the photo above look old enough for the barrel to be stamped “30” instead of 30-30. It probably has a 5 digit serial number, which would make more than 70ish years old..? You can see it here in its modern form as it is still produced and sold by Winchester: http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/catalog/detail.asp?family=003c&mid=534199

    Wikipedia has an “okay” overview of this rifle here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_1894

    It pains me to no end to see this murderer chose a “30” to issue his evil. In my eyes, by doing so, he simply added insult to his already infinite violation against humanity and God.

    • The BBC news readers had trouble with translating the weapon’s description from the original report in French.

  14. If you leave the lever in the down position and look at it from the side, the lever now looks like (to most of the ignorant public/media) a pistol grip from one of those nasty black killing rifles.

  15. Ben says:
    October 25, 2014 at 15:26
    “lol no one is soiling their panties, we aren’t a nation of cowards like you guys. This was one lunatic loser, nothing more.” Why, exactly are we a nation of cowards Ben? Seems like an odd statement coming from the citizen of a country that has no second amendment and let their government regulate gun ownership to the point of being ridiculous. I would agree that this guy certainly does not represent the average Canadian. Odd that he was able to get that rifle and get all the way into Parliament. Especially for a country that seems to pride itself on how it’s gun control laws do so much to prevent violence.

  16. The rifle allegedly used is probably typical of the type of firearm the RCMP confiscate from mentally unstable people living in rural areas.

    Consider the possiblity of this incident being a low-budget Canadian version of a false flag operation carried out by elements associated with RCMP and CSIS (Canadian equivalents of FBI and CIA).

    The dead gunman was a homeless, hopeless crack addict (birth certificate name Joseph Hall). He was staying at a homeless shelter in Ottawa just prior to the “Ottawa Shooting”.

    It’s no stretch to consider him a Manchurian Candidate who was armed and taken by his handlers to the action site. Arming him with a “collector’s item” Winchester rifle was just a safety measure to ensure he would pose no lethal threat to armed and forewarned security personnel stationed at the entrance to Parliament where the gunman was easily taken out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *